War Against ISIS

wittmanace said:

I have to say that one thing that surprised me is the lack of reference to operation serval amongst the people coming with claims of responsibility. When it was clear it was an Islamist fundamentalist attack, though I heard there had been Syria references, I had thought that there would be references to serval directly or the Maghreb more generally. It is still early of course, but it is interesting to me.

I see that news now is that an attack in Istanbul was foiled, with the daily mail provisionally saying the attacks were planned in raqqa.

I'm not sure what to read into this. I was not under the impression that Isis was that geographically centred, in terms of where their terrorist operatives directed their allegiance. I'm not sure how to phrase that better. What I mean is to ask if it is becoming the case that Isis as a geographically defined state of sorts is their rallying call and allegiance centre? As opposed to a general idea as their rallying call and allegiance core. Or maybe I am reading too much into things at an early stage?

Click to expand...

The Caliphates existence demands control of land, and so Daesh will always be a geographically defined state, very different to some of the other Islamo-fascists groups. It also means 'boots on the ground' will be very important to rest control of Syria and Iraq from them. Whose boots is another question.

Compared to the failed ISIS campaign to take Kobane, I was expecting a similar battle of attrition for Sinjar due to it's strategic value. Yet, ISIS folded rather quickly, apparently unwilling or unable to pour in the men and weapons to defend their prize. I guess those huge stockpiles of weapons and supplies abandoned and gifted by the Iraqi Army have been largely depleted. The air campaign had also been more aggressive in providing tactical support to the Peshmerga and would have deterred any efforts to reinforce the garrison. As suggested by one retired military talking head, this could be an indication that ISIS is becoming a spent force. They are increasingly on the defensive. Sinjar may be a welcome outcome but taking Raqqa and Mosul may follow that script. Those 2 cities underpin the whole Caliphate narrative. Amanpour cites her sources who opine that a major reason ISIS has been able to attract so much foreign support is their claim of statehood, occupying and governing large swathes of territory. It's a powerful idea that needs to be smashed.

Obama and Putin talked and seem to be working toward a political solution per CNN. The US is reportedly praising Russia airstrikes vs ISIS. No doubt spurred on by the Metrojet and Paris attacks.

barney41 said:

Compared to the failed ISIS campaign to take Ramadi, I was expecting a similar battle of attrition for Sinjar due to it's strategic value. Yet, ISIS folded rather quickly, apparently unwilling or unable to pour in the men and weapons to defend their prize. I guess those huge stockpiles of weapons and supplies abandoned and gifted by the Iraqi Army have been largely depleted. The air campaign had also been more aggressive in providing tactical support to the Peshmerga and would have deterred any efforts to reinforce the garrison. As suggested by one retired military talking head, this could be an indication that ISIS is becoming a spent force. They are increasingly on the defensive. Sinjar may be a welcome outcome but taking Raqqa and Mosul may follow that script. Those 2 cities underpin the whole Caliphate narrative. Amanpour cites her sources who opine that a major reason ISIS has been able to attract so much foreign support is their claim of statehood, occupying and governing large swathes of territory. It's a powerful idea that needs to be smashed.

Click to expand...

Personally, I would have to respectfully disagree. I believe that DAESH is using a multi-stage plan to establish a world-wide caliphate. From what I know, the first step could be Al-Qaeda, but I am not sure if there has been that much continuity between DAESH and it. The other first step could be the preparations in Iraq for the conquest. Secondly, the next stage that I see would be the conquest and expansion stage. Then, the global infiltration and small numbers of radicalization of locals, relatively speaking. During this stage, radicalization is not strongly tied to the individual's religion. The third stage would be world-wide terror attacks; these will most likely be tied to migrants and locals, rather than direct DAESH operatives. This would force governments between a rock and a hard place; they would be very highly pressured by public opinion to do something to stop these attacks, but would also be very likely to abuse that power. This could led to the radicalization of the local Muslim population. Of course, there are many potential courses of action by governments, but I am focusing on the best, for DAESH, case scenario. At this point, reliable prediction of events gets hazy at best, but I would say a world-wide sectarian conflict is not impossible or improbable. Also, I believe that the central strategic "move" used by DAESH is forcing two very bad choices on its enemies. One example would be at its physical birth, where troops on the ground and not troops on the ground were the two main options. I think everyone here can understand why these options are very bad for any of DAESH's enemies.
I am sorry for the somewhat rambling nature of this post.
Sincerely,
Stranger

@Muukaleinen - I was speculating very narrowly on the military situation on the ground in Syria and Iraq. The ISIS threat is obviously not confined to that region and is very complex.

Since ISIS have oil fields under their control and are pumping oil from them who are they selling the oil to? Why are there no sanctions against the countries purchasing it?

If you cut of the flow of oil, you cut of their income, then they can't afford the education and social programs they have.

KiwiRob said:

Since ISIS have oil fields under their control and are pumping oil from them who are they selling the oil to? Why are there no sanctions against the countries purchasing it?

If you cut of the flow of oil, you cut of their income, then they can't afford the education and social programs they have.

Click to expand...

It's complicated. They're selling oil to everyone, including Assad. And oil is not their only source of income. It may not even be the main one. They make a lot of money by confiscating things from the population, and through foreign funding. Also remember economic activity inside their territory does not simply stop.

barney41 said:

So, absent evidence that 24 x 7 surveillance would provide, what will be the basis for offing them or putting them in camps?

Click to expand...

In France's case there are roughly 5,000 potential terrorist suspects, clearly a number that can't be watched 24/7. Their current approach seems to be watching the high risk suspects for a period and if they haven't done anything within a certain time period they move on to a new suspect. The terrorists in the January attack and apparently some in the current attack were known to security agents.

If French citizens are willing to allow this BS to continue then I guess my offing or camp solution is not needed. The 24/7 surveillance will not work unless France gets another 100,000 agents which is impossible.

A brief update.

A closer look at the French air strikes in Raqqa, including a map. The second link has footage of an unidentified air strike in Raqqa, speculating that it's Russian, but this is likely footage of the French strike.

Ð¤Ñ€Ð°Ð½Ñ†Ð¸Ñ Ð½Ð°Ñ‡Ð°Ð»Ð° бомбардировки Ракки - Colonel Cassad
ВКС нанеÑли авиаудары по Ракке - Блог ÐлекÑандра Шакуна

Video of Russian air strikes in Hama. There is a good chance that this province will see a major Syrian effort in the near future.

Работа авиации РФ в провинции Хама - Блог ÐлекÑандра Шакуна

Russian Mi-8AMTSh helos are being used to move Iraqi Shiite militias around Syria. It's unclear whether they're also being used for fire support, this is less likely, but still possible. The Mi-8AMTSh can carry practically all the weapons that the hinds can.

Ми-8ÐМТШ ВВС РоÑÑии в Сирии. Ðовое задание? - mikael655

In the Syrian express, Kyzyl-60 is returning from Syria. It's departure for Syria went unnoticed. There are now 4 of these civilian cargo haulers at work on the Syrian express, in addition to the rest.

"Кызыл-60" идет из Сирии - bmpd

ISIS connections to the Paris attacks are beginning to turn up.

Íîâîñòè NEWSru.com :: Íàçâàíî èìÿ ïðåäïîëàãàåìîãî îðãàíèçàòîðà è ñïîíñîðà òåðàêòîâ â Ïàðèæå

Australia was excluded from the Vienna talks on Russia's insistence.

Íîâîñòè NEWSru.com :: The Guardian: Àâñòðàëèþ èñêëþ÷èëè èç ïåðåãîâîðîâ ïî Ñèðèè èç-çà âîçðàæåíèé ÐÔ ïðîòèâ åå ó÷àñòèÿ

France warns of more terror attacks to come in Europe.

Íîâîñòè NEWSru.com :: Ïðåìüåð Ôðàíöèè ïðåäóïðåäèë: òåððîðèñòû ãîòîâÿò íîâûå àòàêè â äðóãèõ ñòðàíàõ Åâðîïû

John Fedup said:

In France's case there are roughly 5,000 potential terrorist suspects, clearly a number that can't be watched 24/7. Their current approach seems to be watching the high risk suspects for a period and if they haven't done anything within a certain time period they move on to a new suspect. The terrorists in the January attack and apparently some in the current attack were known to security agents.

If French citizens are willing to allow this BS to continue then I guess my offing or camp solution is not needed. The 24/7 surveillance will not work unless France gets another 100,000 agents which is impossible.

Click to expand...

What evidence or suspicion threshold are you suggesting for offing people? And what do you mean by camps? Who exactly are you suggesting putting in camps and for how long?

Maybe the best solution is to put suspects of interest under house arrest with a tagging system aswell and if these people have been in the country for less than 5yrs then refuse their asylum regardless of where they come from.I feel this is going to be a really long conflict because even if we successfully defeat isis we cant leave with Hezbollah/shia militias and i'm afraid Kurdish fighters having the power and weapons they have all these forces will still be a problem.

wittmanace said:

What evidence or suspicion threshold are you suggesting for offing people? And what do you mean by camps? Who exactly are you suggesting putting in camps and for how long?

Click to expand...

For starters, any citizen known to be fighting for ISIS should be targeted and at the very least prevented from ever returning. Camps would be detention centres for suspects deemed to be serious threats that would normally require surveillance. Lesser threats would have normal surveillance. The threshold is whatever a nation feels is necessary for security while balancing personal freedoms. Clearly this balance will be different depending on geography and political opinion.

As for detention length, forever, unless they are immigrants in which case they can opt for deportation.

So . . you will imprison 'suspects', i.e. people who as far as you know haven't committed any crimes - forever.

I don't want to live in a world run by you, & if you ever try to impose your tyranny (for that is what you propose) on this country I will fight you in every way I can. You propose destroying civilisation in order to save it.

swerve said:

So . . you will imprison 'suspects', i.e. people who as far as you know haven't committed any crimes - forever.

I don't want to live in a world run by you, & if you ever try to impose your tyranny (for that is what you propose) on this country I will fight you in every way I can. You propose destroying civilisation in order to save it.

Click to expand...

....and so your solution is to spend billions upon billions on 24/7 security watching these morons? Bankrupcty or death as a solution, no thanks,

John Fedup said:

For starters, any citizen known to be fighting for ISIS should be targeted and at the very least prevented from ever returning. Camps would be detention centres for suspects deemed to be serious threats that would normally require surveillance. Lesser threats would have normal surveillance. The threshold is whatever a nation feels is necessary for security while balancing personal freedoms. Clearly this balance will be different depending on geography and political opinion.

As for detention length, forever, unless they are immigrants in which case they can opt for deportation.

Click to expand...

John Fedup said:

....and so your solution is to spend billions upon billions on 24/7 security watching these morons? Bankrupcty or death as a solution, no thanks,

Click to expand...

The USA tried that in the second world war with our citizens of Japanese descent. It was a disaster, something we regretted and ultimately we had to compensate those imprisoned. What you propose is essentially winding down our country into something we fought to avoid. There has to be a better way. No thanks.

Art

2007yellow430 said:

The USA tried that in the second world war with our citizens of Japanese descent. It was a disaster, something we regretted and ultimately we had to compensate those imprisoned. What you propose is essentially winding down our country into something we fought to avoid. There has to be a better way. No thanks.

Art

Click to expand...

Agreed, that was a failed policy but it is not an equal comparison. Prior to Dec 7/41, I don't recall any Japanese terrorist attacks on US territory. Had this been the case the US would have declared war shortly afterwards. The Muslim record on the other hand.....

The local Muslim communities have to become more proactive and cooperate with authorities to help identify threats within their ranks. They are in the best position to do so. They always seem to profess shock after an attack and claim it has nothing to do with their religion. Fine, then it should be no problem to treat them as people potentially planning criminal acts that need to be brought to the attention of Police. They wouldn't hesitate reporting a non-Muslim IMO. There just seems to be too much cultural pressure and insular thinking holding them back.

barney41 said:

The local Muslim communities have to become more proactive and cooperate with authorities to help identify threats within their ranks. They are in the best position to do so. They always seem to profess shock after an attack and claim it has nothing to do with their religion. Fine, then it should be no problem to treat them as people potentially planning criminal acts that need to be brought to the attention of Police. They wouldn't hesitate reporting a non-Muslim IMO. There just seems to be too much cultural pressure and insular thinking holding them back.

Click to expand...

When torture, permanent internment and offing of people for being suspects is the case I imagine most people would rather err on the side of not reporting suspicions.


I don't see how someone being a Muslim places a bigger responsibility on them to do anything. They aren't responsible for anyone else other than themselves in the sense that a shared or professed faith doesn't mean the behaviour of others reflects on them in any way. Breivik doesn't represent Norwegians and these terrorist nutters don't represent anyone other than themselves when they carry out their atrocities.

wittmanace said:

When torture, permanent internment and offing of people for being suspects is the case I imagine most people would rather err on the side of not reporting suspicions.


I don't see how someone being a Muslim places a bigger responsibility on them to do anything. They aren't responsible for anyone else other than themselves in the sense that a shared or professed faith doesn't mean the behaviour of others reflects on them in any way. Breivik doesn't represent Norwegians and these terrorist nutters don't represent anyone other than themselves when they carry out their atrocities.

Click to expand...

They are the community in which these threats live and work and play. They are in the best position to notice worrisome signs and behaviors. It's their civic duty to act responsibly to help prevent crimes. Assimilation is a 2-way street and any ethnic/religious group has to adapt to fit into it's adopted country. They are a big part of any solution. Inaction or apathy only contributes to the problem.

wittmanace said:

What evidence or suspicion threshold are you suggesting for offing people? And what do you mean by camps? Who exactly are you suggesting putting in camps and for how long?

Click to expand...

To be fair, even though I strongly disapprove of those kind of solutions: Offing suspects is exactly what the USA have been doing for quite some time now.

Ignoring the kidnapping, torture and imprisonemt of european citizens in europe and abroad without trial, the drone strikes executed by the US in Pakistan and other States which are not in a state of war is pretty close to "offing" suspects, especially when we look at the regular news of drone strikes hitting either civilians or cause massive colateral damage which include "military aged males" i.e. teenager 12 yrs old and up.

swerve said:

So . . you will imprison 'suspects', i.e. people who as far as you know haven't committed any crimes - forever.

I don't want to live in a world run by you, & if you ever try to impose your tyranny (for that is what you propose) on this country I will fight you in every way I can. You propose destroying civilisation in order to save it.

Click to expand...

This is also my impression of Guantanamo Bay, isn't it for many of the prisoners?

We should not be so hipocritical and pretend to be shocked by the idea of implementing strategys at home we have seen abroad for quite some time now.

barney41 said:

They are the community in which these threats live and work and play. They are in the best position to notice worrisome signs and behaviors. It's their civic duty to act responsibly to help prevent crimes. Assimilation is a 2-way street and any ethnic/religious group has to adapt to fit into it's adopted country. They are a big part of any solution. Inaction or apathy only contributes to the problem.

Click to expand...

I do actually think that the community is cooperating already. The Goverments seem to have a fairly good idea of which moscs are the breeding ground of extremist circles and where an islamist scene is present. This is, given the size and numbers of the european muslim community, a pretty strong hint that the goverment is informed from within said community. It would be an extremly cost and time consuming effort to find those scenes if there were no cooperation. Besides that I don't see how the muslim community could present any further informations without "activly inflitrating" said circles and get in personal danger. Those terrorist operatives get some training and there will be a transfer of knowledge how to avoid detection and operate under the radar. I don't expect them to loan huge sums of money a week prior to the planed attact if you catch my drift, I guess they just keep on living their normal day to day routine till they act out their plans.

We should keep in mind that it is one of the goals of islamist terrorist to breed misstrust between the muslim and non muslim population to an extent where the hand of the goverment is forced to react in a way that strengthens the terrorists.

I.e. when we put pressure on the muslim community and show an attitude of misstrust "They sure knew" / "they wouldnt hesitate to report him if it was a non muslim", this will lead to a great part of the muslim population feeling insulted and rejected. From this position it is easy to see how an process of isolating oneself from the non muslim population can start and how maybe even unjust and extreme measures like torture or imprisonemt without supporting evidence of guilt may lead to a feeling of beeing forced into war with the "unbelievers".